If you think the gig economy might be the answer to gender wage disparity, think again—at least when it comes to a car-sharing service such as Uber.

Research conducted by two economists from the University of Chicago found that men working for Uber earned 7 percent more per hour than women, despite the firm’s reportedly gender-blind algorithm for work assignments.

“When starting the research we could see it going either way: Women might earn a bit less because they would want to work at specific, and potentially less lucrative, times that fit their other obligations better,” says John A. List, the Kenneth C. Griffin Distinguished Service Professor in Economics at the University of Chicago and co-author of a working paper on the research. “Alternatively, women tend to work fewer hours so they might have a chance to cherry pick and focus their hours during the most lucrative times.”

In the end, the researchers found other factors at work in determining pay, such as the value of on-the-job learning and driving speeds. They included:

∙ Male drivers work more—17.98 hours a week compared to 12.82 a week for women. The researchers said this, in turn, gave them an edge in learning how to choose potential passengers based on how far the driver has to travel to pick them up, the distance to the intended destination and other factors that can influence pay. A fully experienced driver, they said, earns about $3 more an hour than a driver with 500 or fewer trips.

Advertisement

∙ Men were more likely to drive in areas and during times in which pay is higher. List says he and the other researchers had “expected women would avoid certain times of the day because they would not want to confront drunk riders or the like.”

∙ Men drive 2.2 percent faster than women working for Uber, thereby increasing the number of trips they can fit into the hours they work.

List, who it should be noted works as a consultant to Uber, points out that the firm might want to tread carefully in responding to the factors behind the wage gap, given it could be counterproductive. He notes that the current system rewards for experience, which is “good for everyone.” And assuming they do so safely, he adds, “both riders and drivers would prefer to arrive at the destination sooner.”

List worked on the study with Professor Paul Oyer and Assistant Professor Rebecca Diamond of Stanford University, as well as Uber Director of Policy Jonathan Hall and Uber data scientist Cody Cook.

David Shadovitz is editor of HRE. He is also co-chair of the HR Tech Conference and chair of the Health & Benefits Leadership Conference. He can be reached at [email protected]

The Evolution of Engagement: From Survey to Strategy

During my early years in the industry, people-minded HR departments had a single weapon at their disposal: the annual employee engagement survey. But as more import has been placed on the entire employee experience, an ever-increasing number of organizations are adopting a holistic engagement strategy.

Turning the Tide

When it comes to employee engagement philosophies, many organizations fall on a spectrum, from centralized authority to decentralized authority. Traditional organizations tend to consider engagement an HR responsibility: a yearly engagement score is their main measure of success, and most of the department’s time is spent maintaining or improving that number. We find that progressively minded organizations, however, entrust managers and individuals to be stewards of their own engagement. This localized approach to employee engagement allows for a more individually tailored program, understanding the unique engagement needs of each employee.

As more and more organizations see the merits of such a decentralized engagement strategy, it is important that they realize the five types of feedback that must be present to support, and ultimately, ensure the practical application of this strategy. First, employees must be confident that their unique voice is heard and acted upon in the organization. Second, employees need to know that their colleagues value their specific effort. Third, employees should understand the impact they make on organizational progress, tracking that impact in a demonstrable way. Fourth, employees must regularly receive authentic, constructive feedback. Lastly, employees need to forge durable, trusting relationships with managers that facilitate forthright communication.

Rough Waters Ahead

The year 2018 will be one for the record books—experts predict one of the lowest U.S. unemployment rates since the start of the new millennium. After hitting a 16-year low in May 2017 with a 4.3 percent unemployment rate, estimates for 2018 are already forecasting rates as low as 3.8 percent. Similarly, jobs are expected to continue growth at current numbers, anywhere from 150,000 to 200,000 new jobs each month.

Regardless of exact numbers, with this trend of low unemployment comes one substantial shift: a loss of hiring power. Since the 2007-2008 recession, organizations have held the upper hand in hiring. They bestowed the jobs that people so desperately needed, and consequently, organizations could drive wages low and provide less-than-ideal work environments. Not so in 2018. As more positions become available (if current trends hold, expect as many as 2.4 million new jobs in 2018) and the economy inches ever closer to full employment, potential hires now have the bargaining power. They demand more, better and faster from employers courting them—and employees needn’t worry about finding a new job, should their employer prove inadequate.

In a situation like this, adding perks to the hiring package might seem like the standard protocol. However, we challenge you to think beyond the foosball table and dedicated barista. If you wish to attract quality talent and retain employees long-term, you must take steps toward a progressive, decentralized engagement strategy.

Predictions for 2018

We’re already noticing many organizations seeking software solutions to help support localized engagement efforts and address the five types of feedback mentioned above. Specifically, organizations are looking for solutions that offer two or more functions, if not all five. As engagement becomes more and more focused on the entire employee experience, organizations want to be able to aggregate all data points in a single place with a simple sign-on experience for their employees.

Although the early 2010s saw organizations almost obsessively concerned with employee/employer fit, many organizations are relaxing their stranglehold on the proverbial perfect match. In line with a decentralized approach to employee engagement, team/employee fit is increasingly important. While employees must still possess some shared, core traits represented in the larger organization, peripheral differences are also embraced.

We see the most decentralized companies turning their focus to engagement drivers rather than engagement scores. Instead of the singular, sacred metric it once was, an engagement score can now function as merely a mile marker along the engagement journey. Organizations on the progressive end of the spectrum focus on providing good inputs—robust manager conversations, OKR tracking, and peer-to-peer recognition, for example—and put less stock in the numeric output of a score.

Questions to Ask Your Organization

How would our entire company describe its employee engagement strategy? How are we sowing engagement into our organizational culture? How can we use our culture to attract and retain employees in 2018?